Rather, the Ninth Amendment is sued to provide a textual justification for the Court to protect non-tenxtual rights, such as the right to privacy. You can, thanks to the 9th amendment. United Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 94–95. Start your 48-hour free trial to unlock this answer and thousands more. • The Supreme Court had not yet established the power to strike down unconstitutional legislation, and it was not widely expected to.
Already a member? What was the role of women according to Hammurabi's code.
The ninth amendment basically just says that if there's no law that prohibits something, you have the right to do it even if the right is not specifically listed in the Bill of Rights or Constitution. margin: 0 .07em !important; Rather, the Ninth Amendment is sued to provide a textual justification for the Court to protect non-tenxtual rights, such as the right to privacy. ©2020 eNotes.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Lucille Ball's great-granddaughter dies at 31, Virginia health officials warn of venomous caterpillars, How tourist avoided prison for bad TripAdvisor reviews, It doesn't get more cruel than Tyrod Taylor's demotion, Scientists debunk Pence debate claim on hurricanes, Experts blast Trump for foreign policy blunders, Many bottled water brands contain toxic chemicals: Report, Video of ICE agents stopping Black jogger, '70s TV star wore 'tiniest' bikini to prove a point, Small town in Texas unites for justice for Jonathan Price, 'This is better than a vaccine': Trump touts virus 'cure'. It is part of the Bill of Rights. Supreme Court justices who belong to the strict constructionist school of interpretation essentially say that the Ninth Amendment is too vague to have any binding authority. Justice Antonin Scalia expressed the view, in the dissenting opinion of Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000), that: The Declaration of Independence ... is not a legal prescription conferring powers upon the courts; and the Constitution's refusal to "deny or disparage" other rights is far removed from affirming any one of them, and even farther removed from authorizing judges to identify what they might be, and to enforce the judges' list against laws duly enacted by the people. It is true the powers of the general government are circumscribed; they are directed to particular objects; but even if government keeps within those limits, it has certain discretionary powers with respect to the means, which may admit of abuse.[8]. And, the Ninth Amendment, in indicating that not all such liberties are specifically mentioned in the first eight amendments, is surely relevant in showing the existence of other fundamental personal rights, now protected from state, as well as federal, infringement. For example, the District Court that heard the case of Roe v. Wade ruled in favor of a "Ninth Amendment right to choose to have an abortion," although it stressed that the right was "not unqualified or unfettered. The other pole maintains that there are unwritten natural rights whose content must inevitably be determined, finally and without the possibility of legislative override, by judges. [T]he rights retained by the people are indeed individual natural rights, but those rights enjoy precisely the same status and are protected in the same way, as before the Bill of Rights was added to the Constitution.